Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 51

Thread: Intel Haswell HD Graphics 4600 Performance On Ubuntu Linux

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,100

    Default Intel Haswell HD Graphics 4600 Performance On Ubuntu Linux

    Phoronix: Intel Haswell HD Graphics 4600 Performance On Ubuntu Linux

    After delivering the Intel Core i7 4770K Haswell benchmarks on Ubuntu Linux this week already, which focused mostly on the processor performance, in this article are the first benchmarks of the Haswell OpenGL Linux performance. Testing was of the Intel HD Graphics 4600 graphics core found on the i7-4770K, which under Linux is supported by Intel's open-source driver.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=18757

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    158

    Default

    Why does the A10-5800K performs so poorly?

    I checked some directx benchmarks on internet and saw that it should perform better than the hd4000 and the hd4600.

    EDIT:

    I found why: the benchmark here is done with the open source driver.

    I think adding a line for the A10 and the catalyst driver would have been appropriate.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Shouldn't Haswell be faster than is being demonstrated here? Were the performance improvements exaggerated by Intel or is the driver not quite ready yet?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    158

    Default

    There are different graphic models. The benchmarks here feature the hd 4600, which is the slowest haswell model.
    Last edited by mannerov; 06-06-2013 at 01:05 PM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    92

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mannerov View Post
    There are different graphic models. The benchmarks here feature the hd 4600, which is the slowest haswell model.
    The are still the HD4200 and HD4400 models that are slower, but the Iris Pro 5x00 are faster.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ObiWan View Post
    The are still the HD4200 and HD4400 models that are slower, but the Iris Pro 5x00 are faster.
    Not consistent with the Windows reviews that show the 4600 still coming in behind the 7660D across the board.
    http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...-4770k_10.html
    http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/I...ell_GPU/3.html


    Also the AMD A10-6800K has been out for several days now, it's faster still. It is supposed to be paired with at least DDR3 2133 at stock speeds, DDR3 2133 and even DDR3 2400 is very cheap.

    Larabel also didn't state what speed of ram was used in these tests.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,435

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Newfie View Post
    Shouldn't Haswell be faster than is being demonstrated here? Were the performance improvements exaggerated by Intel or is the driver not quite ready yet?
    The benchmarks seem to be showing ~40% improvement over hd4000 with the hd4600. So, this is a linux issue.
    Still, not bad considering they've only just been released.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    327

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mannerov View Post
    Why does the A10-5800K performs so poorly?

    I checked some directx benchmarks on internet and saw that it should perform better than the hd4000 and the hd4600.

    EDIT:

    I found why: the benchmark here is done with the open source driver.

    I think adding a line for the A10 and the catalyst driver would have been appropriate.
    This last-gen AMD APU should perform faster when using the latest improvements as the hand-tuned shaders...
    But I think a fair comparison should include the proprietary driver.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    26

    Default

    Michael, pls add to phoronix min and max FPS, because showing avarage FPS is so noobish form of test. Why this simple feature couldn't be added since 2008?!
    I was stoping using phoronix to testing games because of lack of this.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    563

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oleid View Post
    This last-gen AMD APU should perform faster when using the latest improvements as the hand-tuned shaders...
    Really, as far as I can tell, the only difference between Trinity and Haswell is slightly higher clocks speeds (that you can achieve in the former with a small overclock), and a faster memory controller (2100 vs 1866). The improvement is 12% from the memory side. If you add ~5% higher clock, it gives a 17% over the board improvement, which is kind of consistent with what I've been seeing online (windows reviews). Did I mean anything?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •